Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Appeals » Page 12
CORONAVIRUS LAW: POSSESSION APPEAL HEARD IN STAY PERIOD: JUDGMENT WILL NOT BE GIVEN UNTIL END OF THE STAY

CORONAVIRUS LAW: POSSESSION APPEAL HEARD IN STAY PERIOD: JUDGMENT WILL NOT BE GIVEN UNTIL END OF THE STAY

June 13, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Coronavirus, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Cavanagh yesterday in  Bromford Housing Association Ltd v Nightingale & Anor [2020] EWHC 1532 (QB) is another variant of the issues relating to the stay of possession proceedings.  In this case the judge declined to…

CORONAVIRUS LAW: STAY LIFTED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF HANDING DOWN APPEAL JUDGMENT

CORONAVIRUS LAW: STAY LIFTED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF HANDING DOWN APPEAL JUDGMENT

June 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Coronavirus, Members Content

In Copeland v Bank of Scotland Plc [2020] EWHC 1441 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman lifted the stay on possession proceedings for the purpose of handing down a judgment on appeal.   THE CASE The action related to possession proceedings brought…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: CPR 3.9 PROPERLY APPLIED IS ARTICLE 6 COMPLIANT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: CPR 3.9 PROPERLY APPLIED IS ARTICLE 6 COMPLIANT

May 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The previous two posts on this blog have been warning against complacency in relation to the Denton principles.  This is the third in that series.  In Magee v Willmott [2020] EWHC 1378 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip allowed an appeal in…

ACCEPTING AN OFFER DURING A HEARING: CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES, NOT PART 36, APPLY: OFFER DID NOT LAPSE AT THE DOOR OF THE COURT

ACCEPTING AN OFFER DURING A HEARING: CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES, NOT PART 36, APPLY: OFFER DID NOT LAPSE AT THE DOOR OF THE COURT

May 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

Offers of settlement can, and often are, made outside the ambit of Part 36.  In MEF v St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust [2020] EWHC 1300 (QB) Mr Justice Morris considered issues relating to late acceptance of offers.  The case shows…

EVALUATING EVIDENCE ON APPEAL: THE APPELLATE COURT WILL NOT READILY DISPLACE THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIAL JUDGE

EVALUATING EVIDENCE ON APPEAL: THE APPELLATE COURT WILL NOT READILY DISPLACE THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIAL JUDGE

May 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to  Christopher Kardahji from Irwin Mitchell solicitors  for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Lenord -v- First Manchester Limited [2020] EWHC 982 (QB).  The judgment contains a detailed analysis of the…

AUTOMATIC STAY OF POSSESSION HEARINGS APPLIES TO APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION THIS MORNING

AUTOMATIC STAY OF POSSESSION HEARINGS APPLIES TO APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION THIS MORNING

May 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus, Members Content

In London Borough of Hackney -v- Okoro [2020] EWCA Civ 681 the Court of Appeal found that the automatic stay on possession proceedings also applies to appeals against possession orders.     THE CASE The Court of Appeal were asked…

ALDRED -V- CHAM: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED BY THE SUPREME COURT

ALDRED -V- CHAM: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED BY THE SUPREME COURT

May 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

In November last year I reported on the case of  Aldred -v- Cham [2019] EWCA Civ 1780, in relation to the recoverability of counsel’s fees in child approval cases. I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose who informs me…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: SUCCESSFUL APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: SUCCESSFUL APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT

May 19, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

High Court decisions in relation to relief of sanctions seem to be coming in pairs.  Yesterday we looked at Depp II v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1237 (QB) today we are looking at the claimant’s successful appeal…

COVID REPEATS 26: YOU HAVE TO PROVE YOU HAVE SUFFERED DAMAGES: FOOTBALL CLUB PITCHES THEIR CASE TOO HIGHLY

COVID REPEATS 26: YOU HAVE TO PROVE YOU HAVE SUFFERED DAMAGES: FOOTBALL CLUB PITCHES THEIR CASE TOO HIGHLY

May 19, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

The next few posts in this series are going to highlight those cases where parties simply failed to prove things at trial (and there are quite a few of these). Today we are looking at  the Court of Appeal decision…

THE IMPORTANCE OF STATEMENTS OF CASE: THE TRIAL SHOULD NOT BECOME A "FREE FOR ALL": COURT OF APPEAL SENDS OUT A WARNING

THE IMPORTANCE OF STATEMENTS OF CASE: THE TRIAL SHOULD NOT BECOME A “FREE FOR ALL”: COURT OF APPEAL SENDS OUT A WARNING

May 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Dhillon v Barclays Bank Plc & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 619 the Court of Appeal reiterated the importance of statements of case in relation to civil litigation.  The statements of case should define the issues at trial.   “It…

MORE ON REMOTE HEARINGS: THE DANGERS OF INJUSTICE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION (IT MAY BE DIFFICULT TO DO JUSTICE OVER THE TELEPHONE IN THE COURSE OF A OVER-BUSY LIST)

MORE ON REMOTE HEARINGS: THE DANGERS OF INJUSTICE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION (IT MAY BE DIFFICULT TO DO JUSTICE OVER THE TELEPHONE IN THE COURSE OF A OVER-BUSY LIST)

April 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Coronavirus, Members Content, Remote hearings

In  B (Children)(Remote Hearing: Interim Care Order) [2020] EWCA Civ 584 the Court of Appeal set out some of the dangers of remote hearings and the need to take considerable care when important decisions are being made. It is also…

REMOTE HEARINGS: CHILDREN CASES: GUIDANCE FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL

REMOTE HEARINGS: CHILDREN CASES: GUIDANCE FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL

April 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Coronavirus, Members Content, Remote hearings

Civil litigators may well be able to gain some assistance from the guidance being given in children cases. The Court of Appeal gave judgment today in Re A (Children) (Remote Hearing: Care and Placement Orders). a-children-judgment-300420 [2020] EWCA Civ 583…

SKYPE HEARINGS AND APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL ARE STEPPING ON THE GAS...

SKYPE HEARINGS AND APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL ARE STEPPING ON THE GAS…

April 8, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Coronavirus, Members Content, Remote hearings

 Teesside Gas Transportation Ltd v Cats North Sea Ltd & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 503 demonstrated that Court of Appeal hearings can take place remotely.   “I have explained how this hearing was undertaken in an attempt to demonstrate the…

DIVISIONAL COURT FINDS THAT EXPERT IN CONTEMPT OF COURT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ERASED FROM MEDICAL REGISTER: “NEW” EVIDENCE ADMITTED

April 8, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment of the Divisional Court today in  General Medical Council & Ors v Zafar [2020] EWHC 846 (Admin) provides an interesting sequel to the earlier judgments in relation to contempt of court by a doctor who had been seriously…

COURT OF APPEAL HEAR CASE BY VIDEOCONFERENCING

COURT OF APPEAL HEAR CASE BY VIDEOCONFERENCING

April 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus, Members Content

Fairly soon, I am sure, the holding of hearings remotely will become such a commonplace that they will pass without comment. In the interim, however, it is worthwhile noting that the Court of Appeal heard an appeal on the 26th…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: THE STANDARD OF PROOF FOR DISHONESTY:  ALSO DELAY OF 22 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT UNACCEPTABLE

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: THE STANDARD OF PROOF FOR DISHONESTY: ALSO DELAY OF 22 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT UNACCEPTABLE

March 18, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

In Bank St Petersburg PJSC & Anor v Arkhangelsky & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 408 the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial because of doubts in relation to the trial judge’s findings of fact.  The judge had applied too high…

"STATEMENTS OF CASE PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN CIVIL LITIGATION WHICH SHOULD NOT BE DIMINISHED": THE COURT OF APPEAL AND THE LEARNING ACADEMY

“STATEMENTS OF CASE PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN CIVIL LITIGATION WHICH SHOULD NOT BE DIMINISHED”: THE COURT OF APPEAL AND THE LEARNING ACADEMY

March 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In November 2018 I wrote about the decision of HHJ Klein in  UK Learning Academy Ltd v The Secretary of State for Education [2018] EWHC 2915 (Comm). An appeal from that judgment has been heard, and dismissed, by the Court of Appeal. …

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT HAD BEEN FLUSHED OUT AND WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: HIGH COURT ALLOWS APPEAL

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT HAD BEEN FLUSHED OUT AND WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: HIGH COURT ALLOWS APPEAL

March 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

In Roberts v Kesson & Anor [2020] EWHC 521 (QB) Mr Justice Jay allowed a defendant’s appeal and held that the trial judge should have found the claimant to be fundamentally dishonest.   The fact that the claimant had been “flushed…

OUT OF TIME APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF ITS UNDERLYING MERITS: DENTON CONSIDERED

OUT OF TIME APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF ITS UNDERLYING MERITS: DENTON CONSIDERED

March 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

For the second time in two days I am writing about a relief from sanctions case where the court took into account the merits of the underlying case.  Yesterday relief was refused because the court held that the case had…

SERVING PROCEEDINGS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSE GOOSE'S APPEAL : THE DANGERS OF OVERLOOKING THE BASIC OBLIGATION TO SERVE

SERVING PROCEEDINGS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSE GOOSE’S APPEAL : THE DANGERS OF OVERLOOKING THE BASIC OBLIGATION TO SERVE

March 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd & Anor v Unknown Persons [2020] EWCA Civ 303 the Court of Appeal upheld the judge’s decision not to grant the claimant any kind of relief due to a failure to properly serve the…

IF THE CAP DON'T FIT A JUDGE DOESN'T HAVE TO ACQUIT: THE ARKIN CAP IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

IF THE CAP DON’T FIT A JUDGE DOESN’T HAVE TO ACQUIT: THE ARKIN CAP IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 25, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In the judgment today in Chapelgate Credit Opportunity Master Fund Ltd v Money & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 24 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision not to apply the “Arkin cap” to a party that had been funding litigation. …

JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO STRIKE OUT ACTION AGAINST NON-EXISTENT COMPANY: ALSO GUIDANCE FOR INSURERS ON MOST PRUDENT COURSE OF ACTION

JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO STRIKE OUT ACTION AGAINST NON-EXISTENT COMPANY: ALSO GUIDANCE FOR INSURERS ON MOST PRUDENT COURSE OF ACTION

February 25, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Striking out

In the judgment in Cowley v LW Carlisle & Company Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 227 today the Court of Appeal dismissed the claimant’s appeal against an order striking out his claim against one defendant.  At the time the striking out…

STRIKING OUT POINTS OF DISPUTE BECAUSE OF LACK OF PARTICULARISATION: PARTIES HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IS IN DISPUTE AND WHY

STRIKING OUT POINTS OF DISPUTE BECAUSE OF LACK OF PARTICULARISATION: PARTIES HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IS IN DISPUTE AND WHY

February 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Members Content

In Ainsworth v Stewarts Law LLP [2020] EWCA Civ 178 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision striking out part of points of dispute. “Common sense dictates that the points of dispute must be drafted in a way which enables…

NO PROTECTIVE COSTS ORDER FOR APPELLANT IN ACCOMMODATION APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

NO PROTECTIVE COSTS ORDER FOR APPELLANT IN ACCOMMODATION APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

February 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In the judgment in Swift v Carpenter [2020] EWCA Civ 165 today the Court of Appeal rejected the claimant’s application for a Protected Costs Order. There are important observations on (i) the scope of Protected Costs Orders; (ii) the exercise…

PLEADINGS ARE IMPORTANT: NO LUCK IN TRYING TO ARGUE AN UNPLEADED CASE ON APPEAL: NOT A "DRY, TECHNICAL POINT"

PLEADINGS ARE IMPORTANT: NO LUCK IN TRYING TO ARGUE AN UNPLEADED CASE ON APPEAL: NOT A “DRY, TECHNICAL POINT”

February 18, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

In  Kalma & Ors v African Minerals Ltd & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 144 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal brought by unsuccessful claimants.  In the judgment it was observed that the claimants were attempting to run a case…

THE DANGERS OF MAKING ORDERS FOR SPLIT TRIALS: DECISION AT TRIAL SET ASIDE DUE TO A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY

THE DANGERS OF MAKING ORDERS FOR SPLIT TRIALS: DECISION AT TRIAL SET ASIDE DUE TO A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY

February 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Murray today in Sharn Panesar Ltd v Pistachios In The Park Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 194 (QB) illustrates some of the dangers of holding a trial on a preliminary issue. In this case a…

INDEMNITY COSTS ON THE GROUNDS OF CONDUCT: FAILURE TO BEAT A DEFENDANT'S PART 36 OFFER: A GARDEN THAT GETS MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE...

INDEMNITY COSTS ON THE GROUNDS OF CONDUCT: FAILURE TO BEAT A DEFENDANT’S PART 36 OFFER: A GARDEN THAT GETS MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE…

February 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

The Court of Appeal decision in Lejonvarn v Burgess & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 114 is the second time this case, about a garden, has been on appeal.   On this occasion the Court of Appeal held that the claimants’ conduct…

PROVING THINGS 172: SPECULATION BY THE DEFENDANT IS NOT EVIDENCE: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

PROVING THINGS 172: SPECULATION BY THE DEFENDANT IS NOT EVIDENCE: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

January 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Morrison v Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 91 (QB) is another illustration of a party asserting something but having no evidence to support it.  This time it was a defendant whose…

JUDGMENT MUST GIVE REASONS (AND NOT SIMPLY INCORPORATE A SKELETON ARGUMENT): THE BAKERS CAN CHALLENGE THEIR ELECTRICITY BILL

JUDGMENT MUST GIVE REASONS (AND NOT SIMPLY INCORPORATE A SKELETON ARGUMENT): THE BAKERS CAN CHALLENGE THEIR ELECTRICITY BILL

January 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Summary judgment

In Fine Lady Bakeries Ltd v EDF Energy Customers Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 87 (QB) Mrs Justice Farbey allowed an appeal against a Deputy District Judge who had granted summary judgment.  The case emphasises the need for a judge…

DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR

DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR

January 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

The Privy Council decision in Attorney General of St Helena v AB & Ors (St Helena) [2020] UKPC 1 is of considerable interest to personal injury practitioners. Issues relating to awards made for pain and suffering are rarely discussed at…

DISCLOSURE OF SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE LATE: THE FACT THAT THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE IS NOT ENOUGH: AN INTERESTING HIGH COURT DECISION

DISCLOSURE OF SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE LATE: THE FACT THAT THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE IS NOT ENOUGH: AN INTERESTING HIGH COURT DECISION

January 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Extensions of time, Members Content

  Angus Fergusson  has kindly sent me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in  Grant -v- Newport City Council [2018] EWHC 3813, it is an interesting case where the judge, on appeal, upheld a decision to refuse…

ADEQUATE TIME ESTIMATES: WAS THIRTY MINUTES LONG ENOUGH?

ADEQUATE TIME ESTIMATES: WAS THIRTY MINUTES LONG ENOUGH?

January 22, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content

One other aspect of the judgment HHJ Lethem in Ivanoy -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020) relates to time estimates. It highlights the importance of giving appropriate time estimates, reviewing the estimate if the matter becomes complex and the…

CLAIMANT WHO FAILS TO OBTAIN COURT FEE REMISSION - CAN RECOVER THE COURT FEE ON APPEAL: CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION ON APPEAL

CLAIMANT WHO FAILS TO OBTAIN COURT FEE REMISSION – CAN RECOVER THE COURT FEE ON APPEAL: CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION ON APPEAL

January 22, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content

I am grateful to Jon Heath from Levins,solicitors,   for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Lethem in Ivanov -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020).  This relates to the issue of whether a claimant, eligible…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: "THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM"

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: “THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM”

December 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Committal proceedings, Costs, Members Content

In January I wrote “I am starting to lose count of the number of times the Court of Appeal has overturned decisions committing people to prison because of very basic and fundamental failures of procedure.  It is as though all…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 76: APPEALS - ASKING THE JUDGE FOR REASONS: "EMBARRASSMENT" IS NO EXCUSE NOT TO

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 76: APPEALS – ASKING THE JUDGE FOR REASONS: “EMBARRASSMENT” IS NO EXCUSE NOT TO

December 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment in Fattahi v Charles Grosvenor Ltd [2019] EWHC 3497 (QB) also highlights the advisability of an appellant, arguing that a decision was not properly reasoned, to ask the original judge for further reasons. “I have been unable to…

"THEY LOST": THE DANGERS OF OVERCONFIDENCE IN CORRESPONDENCE

“THEY LOST”: THE DANGERS OF OVERCONFIDENCE IN CORRESPONDENCE

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content

“Never write anything you will be embarrassed by the court reading” is an essential piece of advice for all lawyers (and one I suspect we have all, occasionally, breached). An example can be seen in the opening lines of the…

PART 36, FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS AND PRE-ACTION SETTLEMENT: A POINT FOR BOTH CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS TO WATCH

PART 36, FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS AND PRE-ACTION SETTLEMENT: A POINT FOR BOTH CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS TO WATCH

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Part 36

The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Kore v Brocklebank [2019] EWHC 3491 (QB) raises some interesting issues in relation to Part 36 and fatal accident claims.  It means that both claimants and defendants will have to take considerable care…

APPEALING A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT IS NOT A JAMBOREE: APPELLANT HAS TO STATE WHAT THEY ARE APPEALING AND HEARING IS CONFINED TO THOSE MATTERS

APPEALING A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT IS NOT A JAMBOREE: APPELLANT HAS TO STATE WHAT THEY ARE APPEALING AND HEARING IS CONFINED TO THOSE MATTERS

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In  PME v The Scout Association [2019] EWHC 3421 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart upheld the decision of Master Leonard in relation to the scope of an appeal from a costs officer. “The consequences of the Appellant’s case are wholly undesirable….

INTEREST ON PART 36 OFFERS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: "THE LAW REPORTS ARE OVER-FULL OF CASES IN WHICH PARTIES MADE OFFERS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF PART 36 AND THEN UNSUCCESSFULLY SOUGHT TO OBTAIN THE PART 36 BENEFITS LATER"

INTEREST ON PART 36 OFFERS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: “THE LAW REPORTS ARE OVER-FULL OF CASES IN WHICH PARTIES MADE OFFERS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF PART 36 AND THEN UNSUCCESSFULLY SOUGHT TO OBTAIN THE PART 36 BENEFITS LATER”

December 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Part 36

In King -v- City of London Corporation [2019] EWCA Civ 2266 the Court of Appeal set out the position in relation to whether an offer exclusive of interest can be made. I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: PART 36: THE GROWTH IN CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS - AND WHY THE CONSEQUENCES USUALLY APPLY

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: PART 36: THE GROWTH IN CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS – AND WHY THE CONSEQUENCES USUALLY APPLY

December 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

Looking back it is clear that this has been a very busy year for cases on Part 36. Part of the reason for this has been the growth in cases relating to claimant’s offers.  There are a number of key…

APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT'S UPHILL STRUGGLE

APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT’S UPHILL STRUGGLE

December 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

The second aspect of the judgment in Essex County Council & Ors v Davies & Ors [2019] EWHC 3443 I want to look at is the defendants’ appeal in relation to damages.  This case reiterates the difficulties (for claimants and defendants)…

CORRECT INTEREST RATE ON COSTS WHEN CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO AWARD 10% OVER BASE

CORRECT INTEREST RATE ON COSTS WHEN CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO AWARD 10% OVER BASE

December 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Interest, Members Content, Part 36

There are several  interesting aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in Essex County Council & Ors v Davies & Ors [2019] EWHC 3443. Here I want to look at the part of the judgment that deals with the…

LITIGATION: NO DUTY TO THE OTHER SIDE IN LITIGATION TO PUT FORWARD YOUR BEST EVIDENCE

LITIGATION: NO DUTY TO THE OTHER SIDE IN LITIGATION TO PUT FORWARD YOUR BEST EVIDENCE

December 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Parties to actions, Professional negligence,

The Court of Appeal judgment this morning in  Revenue And Customs v Charles (t/a Boston Computer Group Europe) [2019] EWCA Civ 2176 contains some important observations in relation to the duties that litigating parties owe to each other.   “If…

HIGH COURT ALLOWS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL FAILING A FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE ON TIME

HIGH COURT ALLOWS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL FAILING A FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE ON TIME

December 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Badejo v Cranston [2019] EWHC 3343 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt overturned the decision of a Circuit Judge and granted relief from sanctions to a claimant who had failed to pay the trial fee in time.   One issue related to…

WHEN SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES DUE TO ABSENT EVIDENCE? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

WHEN SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES DUE TO ABSENT EVIDENCE? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

November 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (Gb) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2110 makes some important points in relation to civil evidence.  It reviews the law relating to the drawing of adverse inferences due…

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE'S DECISION

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE’S DECISION

November 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content

In  L’Oreal (UK) Ltd & Anor v Liqwd Inc & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1943  the Court of Appeal confirmed the trial judge’s decision not to admit new evidence that a defendant attempted to introduce after judgment was handed down….

THE SELF INFLICTED WOUNDS OF A "TRUSTED BRAND"/"CAPRICIOUS MID-VICTORIAN FACTORY-OWNER": THE DANGERS OF PUTTING YOUR CASE TOO HIGH

THE SELF INFLICTED WOUNDS OF A “TRUSTED BRAND”/”CAPRICIOUS MID-VICTORIAN FACTORY-OWNER”: THE DANGERS OF PUTTING YOUR CASE TOO HIGH

November 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment of Lord Justice Coulson rejecting the Post Office’s application for permission to appeal is available on “Post Office Trial”, a case that has already been looked at several times on this blog.   Here we have a critical appraisal…

FIXED COSTS NOT OVERTURNED BY THE TERMS OF AN AMBIGUOUS PART 36 OFFER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

FIXED COSTS NOT OVERTURNED BY THE TERMS OF AN AMBIGUOUS PART 36 OFFER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

November 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In  the judgment today in Ho v Adelekun [2019] EWCA Civ 1988 the Court of Appeal held that fixed costs still applied to a case  where an offer of settlement did not expressly refer to costs being fixed. “…parties who…

AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL ON A COSTS BUDGETING DECISION: SHOULD A QC BE ALLOWED - OR IS THAT A LEADING QUESTION?

AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL ON A COSTS BUDGETING DECISION: SHOULD A QC BE ALLOWED – OR IS THAT A LEADING QUESTION?

November 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The case of  Easteye Ltd v Malhotra Property Investments Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 2820 (Ch) is unusual in that it is an appeal against a costs budgeting decision.  Nugee J refused the claimant’s appeal against the District Judge’s decision…

WHEN "ROBUST" CASE MANAGEMENT TURNS INTO APPARENT BIAS: HIGH COURT OVERTURNS DIRECTIONS: THE TALE OF THE ORGAN GRINDER

WHEN “ROBUST” CASE MANAGEMENT TURNS INTO APPARENT BIAS: HIGH COURT OVERTURNS DIRECTIONS: THE TALE OF THE ORGAN GRINDER

November 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

In Dorman & Ors v Clinton Devon Farms Partnership [2019] EWHC 2988 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini allowed an appeal against directions made by a Circuit Judge. He also upheld an appeal against that judges refusal to recuse himself on…

← Previous 1 … 11 12 13 … 19 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: “THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES…”
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 19th JUNE 2026 (TOGETHER WITH A USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRE AND SERIES OF CHECKLISTS)
  • THE “WEAPONISATION” OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT’S NOT CLEVER, IT’S NOT “TOUGH” AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE “A GREAT MYSTERY” TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS…)

Top Posts

  • THE "WEAPONISATION" OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT'S NOT CLEVER, IT'S NOT "TOUGH" AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: "THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES..."
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE "A GREAT MYSTERY" TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS...)

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.